Wide angle lens for Canon 7D?

I'm considering my next lens purchase for my Canon 7D. I currently own an EF70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM and the kit EF28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lenses. I'm looking for a sharp wide angle primarily for landscape work. With the 1.6 crop factor for the 7D, it's tough to get wide. I rented the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM but it was too wide.

I'm seriously considering either the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM or the Zeiss Distagon T* 2,8/21. Prices are comparable. A friend had a Zeiss on his Sony camera that took great pictures.

Does anyone have experience, good or bad, with either of these lenses? Has anyone tried the Zeiss Distagon T* 2,8/21 on a 7D (i.e., will it be wide enough)?

Re: Wide angle lens for Canon 7D?

Bud,

You consider the 10-20mm too wide so I would expect that both the 11-16mm and 12-24mm Tokina lenses would also be too wide for your needs. However, the 12-24mm is a longer lens at both ends.

The 16-35L is a great lens but, IMO, it is a better focal length for a full frame camera because you really don't have a great choice when it comes to full frame lenses. It is wide enough as a wide lens but really is not long enough as a mid-range zoom.

I have not shot with a 21mm Zeiss but, when my widest lens was a 20mm Canon on a 1.6x crop camera, I didn't consider it quite wide enough. I also did not like being saddled with a prime lens because now that zooms have very-good to excellent image quality, I prefer shooting with zooms.

IMO, one of the best all around lenses (including for landscapes) on a 1.6x camera is the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, closely followed by the 17-50mm Tamron f/2.8 (VC or non-VC). I absolutely love my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and use it, combined with a 70-20mm f/4L IS for virtually all my photography. The 17-55mm would match quite well with your 70-300mm lens (I don't miss the 55-70mm gap at all) and you could either sell your 28-135mm or keep it as a back-up lens. I gave mine on my older 350D camera to my son-in-law who absolutely loves the lens.

It is wide enough that I don't "need" to carry a wider lens (the 27.2 mm equivalent is wide enough for me in most of my shooting) and the constant f/2.8 aperture and great IS makes this a very viable low light glass. The lens provides excellent AF and great IQ. In fact, one of the main reasons I remained with the 1.6x format is the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens.

Re: Wide angle lens for Canon 7D?

Hi Bud,

The EF16-35 F2.8L USM II is (traditionally) one of my primary work horses. Often on my FF camera it's wider than I need, but on a CF camera like the 7D I think it would be perfect.

I've written this many times before (and here it is again), but I think a LOT of people mistakenly assume that "wider is better" for landscape (or automatically associate "wide angle" and "landscape" in their minds), but often I think that they don't do themselves any favours. The problem is that the wider the angle, the less detail that you capture -- to the point where mountains in the distance can cover hundreds and hundreds of miles - and often it's just not a satisfying look. where they DO come into their forte is when you can get very agressive perspectives on foreground objects.

I wrote an article for Singh-Ray's blog on this topic some time ago ...

Re: Wide angle lens for Canon 7D?

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

where they DO come into their forte is when you can get very aggressive perspectives on foreground objects.

Thanks, Colin. I know what you mean. I want the wide angle for just that purpose, especially in Hawaii. What I really want is a tack sharp lens. There are great opportunities here to include beautiful flowers in the foreground with a breath-taking Hawaiian backdrop.

Re: Wide angle lens for Canon 7D?

The EF16 to 35F/2.8L MkII is an astounding lens and I use it on my APS-C cameras as my standard zoom: HOWEVER if I only had a 7D and if I decided that a 10 to 22 was too wide for my needs – I would be buying the EF-S17 to 55F/2.8 IS USM – (and not just for the use of making landscape images).

As you mention “tack sharp”, and you seem to have a passion for zoom lenses – then with the purchase of the 17 to 55 one could consider the worth (or not) of keeping the 28 to 135 . . . and then it is only step away from re-consideration of the 70 to 300, making way for the EF70 to 200F/4L IS USM – arguably the sharpest or second sharpest 70 to 200L Canon has produced – that’s if one can really see, in day to day shooting, any differences between the five of them.

If you want to pursue the route of manual focus Prime Lenses: to reap maximum rewards from them, especially for Landscape Photography purposes, you should consider changing your camera format.